Thinking of getting rid of my EM1's... Thoughts?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by gryphon1911, Feb 11, 2017.

  1. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    Get the best tools for the job. If it's the D500, get a D500. Keep the Pen-F for your personal shooting and the D500 for the other stuff. Seems like an easy decision!
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Zuri

    Zuri Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 20, 2016
    NJ, USA
    Agree. Use D500 for critical work, Pen-F for personal. Sell all others.
  3. wolfie

    wolfie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Interesting no one has asked what AF and drive settings you were using - especially as Olympus AF system is completely unlike C or N and the settings paradigm also very different. There is a fair bit of user information coming back for BIF and wildlife set ups but not so much on sports. I've seen some reports on soccer/football successes with M1.2 and the 300mm Pro, PEN & Tell site I think. Could be worth checking out sports shooters before taking dumping the gear.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  4. t.eggleston

    t.eggleston New to Mu-43

    Feb 9, 2017
    Todd Eggleston
    I have em-1m2 (recent aquire), a lot of lenses (i always buy too much). it does not do as well as my 1Dx-m2. I have canon lenses that I could sell (one) to pay for the whole Oly system. I may well do that. I like both. Buy / keep what makes you happy and what you need. The Oly will travel, shoot decent sports (outdoors), street walk, and do decent landscape. My canon beast will cover big sports, and may pull out for occasional other still life.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    If the D500 is what keeps you in the money - then that is the choice. If you are trying to get the Olympus to work like the Nikon - that is a loosing battle. When I moved from Olympus 4/3s to Nikon I had to learn how to best maximize the Nikon focusing/exposure system. Since I'm moved to m4/3s I learned that I could finesse the Olympus to maximize its focusing/exposure system - which is much less critical with the OM-D E-M1 Mark II.

    With that said, I still have my Nikon system, but it keeps getting used less and less.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Growltiger

    Growltiger Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 26, 2014
    Two thoughts.
    1. I would ask whether you also take photos where you need a long telephoto lens and will be carrying it around all day, for example hiking or when travelling, particularly in hot countries. This became the breaking point for me with heavier and larger cameras. Switching from D300 and lenses to E-M1 and lenses halved the weight.

    2. A factor with sports would be whether the sport photos benefit from use of Pro Capture. We have see here that tennis does - the results are wonderful, easily showing the point the ball has just hit the racquet. I guess that doesn't apply with hockey.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  7. wlewisiii

    wlewisiii Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 16, 2011
    Hayward, WI
    William B. Lewis
    I have been following the thread and find i don't have any particularly valuable advice to give. As a mostly landscape photographer who is on the edge of trying to go pro, the m4/3 system is more than good enough. For me, the question is more the opposite- should I find the money to add a Nikon Df to use all the really nice AI & even Pre-AI Nikkor lenses that are out there in thos situations where a SLR or full frame are better?

    These kinds of questions are not especially easy to find an answer to and in the end all I can offer you is a heartfelt "Good luck and good light". I'll look forward to seeing what you decide to do.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  8. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    If action sports is important to you, and you've demonstrated by your own tests that the D500 is significantly better, then you have your answer - so long as size/weight isn't an issue. Critical focus in that sort of photography is vital and unless a camera can reliably achieve it, then it's not fit for the job.

    For me, I do a lot of landscapes and have played with the A7Rii in the past. There the equation is a little harder. Sure the Sony's better, but at base ISO I can still get extremely pleasing prints from my u43 gear (esp the 20Mp sensors) and the size/weight/features are better too, so I'm sticking with it.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    I tested all the C-AF modes and the Pro Capture mode. While interesting, the types of sports, outside baseball don't really benefit from it for me.

    Weight has never been an issue for me. I'm a pack mule and can carry a ton. Even if I wanted to go lighter, the Nikon 300/4E PF and teleconverter makes for the FOV to 600 quite easily on a DX body. Plus, I can use the PEN F and the 75-300 in good light for long reach if need be.
  10. zensu

    zensu Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Aug 8, 2012
    Alabama USA
    I'm perfectly happy with my ยต43's system. I am not an action shooter and I never print anything bigger than 11" x 14" so I am very pleased with my E-P5's and E-M1.1, why hassle with carrying more than you need especially if you have health problems that are affected by carrying a heavier load.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Jock Elliott

    Jock Elliott Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 13, 2015
    Troy, NY
    Jock Elliott
    As a former full-time freelance writer (largely retired now), I understand the need to deliver results to put bread on the table. So I say: use whatever makes it easy to reliably deliver results for which people will pay you.

    Cheers, Jock
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 20, 2014
    You really have to pick the right tool for the job. If your main activity is shooting sports then a DSLR like the D500 is still the best option. Anyone who tells you differently is not being honest.

    M43 provides excellent opportunities for many things, but even the EM1-II and GH5 are still not up to DSLR focusing speeds. Other than cash, I'm not sure what is holding you back.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Pluttis

    Pluttis Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 14, 2016
    Go for the camera that is best suited for the work and get it done easiest, seems like a no brainer if you already have bought into the Nikon system
    Curious...what have you been using up until now for that kind of work....the D300? If D300 did the work fine the EM1 MarkII will do as good or better, its just not going to do as good as the D500 which none of the other cameras in this price category will do either.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. getoutandshoot

    getoutandshoot Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 28, 2012
    SF Bay area, CA
    I don't post a lot here, but like Andrew, I currently own both the D500 and the EM-1 Mark II, and like him, I'm strongly considering dropping one system. I figure we're in a pretty small club: not too many people would buy both of these very expensive camera bodies within a 12 month period. I mean if you are a professional and you use cameras for your work, that's one thing; but I'm not. I'm just a hobbyist and I work full time doing something else. I struggle to get out an use 1 of my systems as much as I should, so having 2 systems like I do, well I would completely admit that I'm nuts. Anyway, I decided to add my thoughts because although my situation is very different from Andrew, I do have both systems and while I have not made a final decision yet, I'm actually leaning the opposite direction. i.e., I am strongly considering unloading my D500 and most of my Nikon gear and going with m4/3 as my sole system at least bird photography.

    Yes, I'm a bird photographer. Although I would love to start doing other nature photography including landscape and macro, what I have pursued most seriously and successfully in recent years is wild bird photography with super telephoto lenses. Also, although I sometimes shoot under cloudy conditions, I would say the majority of the time I shoot when the weather is nice and at least partly sunny. I sometimes use flash, but I have come to believe that direct sunlight significantly increases my chances for getting really good bird photos with excellent color and contrast. I can usually try to plan my outings to coincide with nice weather. So all this needs to be said right up front because I'm a different photographer than Andrew, who said the bulk of his "pro" shooting is high ISO/low light. I'm not a pro and the bulk of my shooting is lower/moderate ISO in good light. Also I have not spent a great deal of time shooting birds in flight (BIF). However BIF is an important priority for me nonetheless. The majority of my bird photos will probably always be perched birds, but I want to try to increase my BIF opportunities and I want gear that is capable of succeeding with BIF.

    So why am I leaning toward dumping my Nikon gear? I could go on and on, but I'll try to hit only the important points.
    • The lighter weight of the Olympus system. Much easier to travel with, much easier to hike long distances. Today I hiked 5-6 miles carrying the Olympus E-M1-II, with 300mm/MC14 and a tripod, and the hike included quite a bit of climbing. I simply couldn't have made it with the Nikon 500mm
    • The electronic shutter and Pro Capture feature, as well as other features that come with mirrorless cameras/electronic viewfinders. I'm lumping a lot of stuff here. Magnifying the image in the viewfinder and then using focus peaking to make damn sure the focus is perfect is really nice. I also really like the completely vibrationless electronic shutter when I use a remote shutter release.
    • The image stabilization is better. I generally try to use a tripod or at least a monopod most of the time, so ironically, this is not a high priority for me. But when I really want to "go light," I don't think there is a better hand-held system for wildlife photography.
    • The continuous AF is getting better and hopefully it is already now good enough to allow me some success with BIF. I need more time to assess how the continuous AF performs for BIF on the E-M1 Mark II. Even if its not quite there yet, I think it will continue to improve, because,...
    • Olympus does meaningful firmware updates, actually adding new features and improvements. I don't know whether Olympus will actually make significant improvements to the E-M1.II continuous AF / tracking through firmware upgrades, but in all the years I owned Nikon cameras, they did almost nothing but fix bugs and add support for new lenses.
    • The quality of the glass. This may surprise some people; and I'll admit it surprises me, but I have decided the Olympus 300mm f/4 lens is better than any of the Nikon telephotos I have used, and that includes 2 excellent primes, one of which is my current 500mm f/4G VR, which cost more than 3 times as much as the Oly 300. ...Which is not to say the Nikon quality is bad, only that Olympus reaches another level, at least with my particular examples of these lenses. In fact I would even go so far as to say that the Olympus 300 with the 1.4X teleconverter is sometimes giving me sharper results and better resolution than my Nikon 500mm ever gave me without a teleconverter. As an example, I will try to attach my best photo from today's outing. The second image is a 100% crop pretty much straight out of camera (E-M1 Mark II at default settings). I only adjusted the exposure in Olympus Viewer 3, then exported an 8 bit .tif and saved it as a jpeg. This is a very tiny bird (Hutton's Vireo), and this is just one example among many. I never got this level of sharpness/detail in a 100% crop from my Nikon 500mm or 300mm prime lenses, with any body.

    Olympus E-M1 Mark II with 300mm f/4 Pro + MC14:
    100% crop with no additional sharpening applied (camera sharpening set to 0):
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2017
    • Like Like x 13
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Nikon's latest generation AF that is in the D500 and D5 is class leading. Ultimately a camera is just a tool, not an investment, and you need a tool that works for you.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    I don't think it's necessary "critical" vs "personal". Just that each camera has their strengths. There is plenty of critical work you can do with a Pen-F, just probably not high level sports.
  17. AussiePhil

    AussiePhil Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 1, 2014
    Canberra, ACT, Aust
    Oh come on. The GH5 is not out for real world use yet and the mk2 will beat most but not all DSLRs in focus speeds and is well acknowledged in SAF that it's near unbeatable. Where it lags it low light high ISO fast complex action CAF Tracking such as the OP mentioned as core reason for selling up. And even then he managed to get based on another thread some gobsmacking good shoots with the mk2.
    He mentioned 80% hit rate of 18fps giving likely 14 good frames per second v 100% of 10fps of the D500. I wonder what happens if the frame rates are the same and the mk2 algorithms have a little more processing time
    • Like Like x 1
  18. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 20, 2014
    You will note that I said "DSLR like the D500", not DSLRs in general. Take low cost consumer DSLR and it's unlikely to exceed the performance of the EM1-II or GH5, so you have to be specific when picking the best tool for the job. Most pro-shooters won't be picking the cheapest DSLR on the shelf.

    The GH5 and EM1-II have amazing AF capabilities that will match or exceed the requirements of the vast majority of M43 users, but for fast, indoor, low light CAF action sports they still can't quite match the likes of the D500.

    If you disagree that's OK, all you need to do is go shoot one/both along side a pro with a D500 and come back with the results. If you got more pro quality keepers I assure you we'll all be very happy to see them and even change our minds :)

    Happily, I don't feel the need to claim M43 is the best in all scenarios just because I chose M43 as my preferred system. If someone decides they need to go to a different system it doesn't devalue my choice in M43, they just want/need different things to me. There are times where other systems may be the better tool. For amateurs missing a few shots here and there is probably not sure a big deal if a pro misses a shot they may also miss their pay check.

    The EM1-II and GH5 are awesome cameras, there is no doubt about that, but maybe, just maybe they're not the 'best at everything' for all people in all scenarios.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Pluttis

    Pluttis Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 14, 2016
    You can shoot sport with just about any camera but some make it a lot easier, the D500 will for sure make it easier which means you will have more success which is really important if you make a living on shooting sports/ choose the tool that is best for you.

    Up untill now many people have successfully been taking "pro quality" keepers with cameras as Nikon D300 and Canon 7D MarkII so i cant really see why someone that knows his sport should not be able to get enought "pro quality" keepers with the EM-1 MarkII. In some sports where the light is good/the conditions are better the difference in "pro quality" keepers between D500 and EM-1 MarkII might not be that big at the end of the day.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2017
  20. AussiePhil

    AussiePhil Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 1, 2014
    Canberra, ACT, Aust
    umm - have a read of my original reply and mine to you.... i said exactly the same thing, now i just need a D500 to play with... said that also...... we seem to actually be on the same boat

    ummm - check me normal posts even in this thread, I don't claim it's the best but the sweeping statements like DLSR's focus faster get right under my skin as they are so broad as to be meaningless... a statement like the D500 has faster better CAF-TR than the EM1mk2 is more accurate.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.